The Government Has a New Vaccine Advisory Panel, and I’m Concerned About What They Might Do Next Week

Centers for Disease Control had a vaccination consultative panel made up of respected experts. This panel, the Consultative Committee for Vaccination Practices (or ACIP), would meet to vote on vaccines that should be recommended by the government. An affirmative vote of the AIPI means that insurance companies must cover this vaccine. But the members of the panel were all suddenly licensed Earlier this month, and now their replacements should meet on June 25, with votes provided for the RSV, vaccines against flu and Thimérosal with perplexity.

I’m going to break down what all this means, why this is probably very bad news, and what to watch out when the panel meets next week. And by the way, if you wanted to get vaccines, I would recommend planning them as soon as possible, when we know that they are always covered, because we do not know what will happen.

What (or was (or was) ACIP?

Dart is the advisory committee for vaccination practices. This is a sign that the CDC is accompanied from time to time to decide to “recommend” certain vaccines. It is not the same thing as the approval of the FDA – the Food and Drug Administration manages this. It is rather a decision to put vaccines on a list of people should get. For example, the flu vaccine is recommended For almost all those who are 6 months old and more.

ACIP decided that health workers should be the first to obtain cocovid photos. It is ACIP that puts various vaccines on the Routine childhood vaccination schedule. Vaccines recommended by the AICI must, by law, be covered by almost all insurance plans without fees for copament or costs for those for whom they are recommended.

Formerly, members of the APIP Understood Experts in vaccine science, pediatrics, immunology, epidemiology and public health. There was a process of in -depth verification for new members who understood to probe conflicts of interest, and all members who had a conflict relating to a specific vote would be withdrawn from this vote.

I looked at a lot of ACIP meetings (they are still live) to report on coids and others. The meetings and members have always been professional, focused on the facts and on the good judgments which encompassed the general effects of all the decisions they ended up taking. The AIPI was widely respected by health professionals and researchers. This does not mean that everyone always agreed with their decisions, but it was largely considered a system that worked well and made millions of Americans had access to the vaccines they needed.

Note my use of the past carefully.

What’s going on with AICI now?

That’s all, perhaps, in the past. The current Secretary of Health and Social Services, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., founded an anti-Vaccin advocacy group before becoming HHS secretary. He said in his confirmation hearings that he I did not intend to withdraw the vaccines from anyoneAnd on occasion has reluctantly admitted that vaccines work– Usually next to propagation or ignition to disinformation on vaccines.

But Kennedy and the other people named politicians who control the government’s branches who treat health care certainly seem to try to reduce access to vaccines. Kennedy tried to cancel the AIPI on coasty vaccinesAnd now seems to take this strategy a step further by simply getting rid of the 17 members of the AIPI and filling the panel with eight handpicked replacements. The Center for Research and Policy of Infectious Diseases at the University of Minnesota General information on new choicesSome of which already have the reputation of “vaccine criticisms”, to use the phrasing of Cidrap.

Votes on several vaccines arrive

APIP meetings are announced to the public, and You can see the agenda for the next meeting here. This is a two -day meeting on June 25 and 26, 2025. Some of the articles on the agenda seem quite typical, such as presentations which give updates on the current situation, to better clarify all the decisions which could be taken later on the new Cèvres vaccines.

But there are a few confusing things to note. After the presentations cowled, there is no vote on the coastal vaccines. The Associated Press reports That some other elements of the expected agenda are missing – proposals for policy on vaccines against HPV and menincoque vaccines are not on the agenda either.

Planned votes relate to maternal and pediatric RSV vaccines; RSV vaccines and Vaccines for children program; antigrippal vaccines (that is, flu vaccines); And “Thimeralal containing recommendations for influenza vaccine”.

The RSV is a virus that can be particularly dangerous for young infants. There is a vaccine that can be given during pregnancy which protects the infant for a few months after birth and an antibody that can be given to infants. These are Currently recommended by ACIPand covered by insurance and by the Vaccines for Children program. We do not know exactly about the agenda what the vote is talking about, nor if the panel can try to reverse this recommendation.

Flu vaccines are also currently recommended, and a vote on the influenza vaccine seems to be a common part of the ACIP agenda (it was June meeting agenda of last yearFor example). Normally, decisions concern which Flu vaccines to recommend because the vaccines offered can change year by year. Hopefully this year’s vote is just as simple.

Finally, there is this perplexed vote on the Thimérosal in vaccines against flu. Thimérosal is a Curator containing mercury It was blamed (without any solid evidence) for a link with autism. By an abundance of caution, it was removed from the formulation of most vaccines in 2001. Some multi-dose vaccine bottles still contain it, including the flu vaccine, which is also available in single dose versions without preservatives. The study after the study showed that thimerosal is not linked to autism or neuropsychological problems. Scientists generally consider this as a closed case.

We can hope that the votes will be conducted appropriately and in accordance with real science surrounding these vaccines. But since this meeting follows a summary reshuffle of the ACIP’s membership, I am not very hopeful.